There are pro-arguments to letting it happen, contrary to your belief, and your opinion on the matter isn't shared by everyone. And what good what banning the sale of accounts here do exactly? Suddenly make it not happen? Only a naive fool would think it would have any positive impact. It would have the exact opposite because a lot of people would then be clueless to the fact that the practise goes on. Banning account sales would literally have zero positive effect here.

Your argument is completely meaningless. How would banning account sales make the trust system any more or less valid? It wouldn't.

There are pro-arguments to letting it happen, contrary to your belief, and your opinion on the matter isn't shared by everyone. And what good what banning the sale of accounts here do exactly? Suddenly make it not happen? Only a naive fool would think it would have any positive impact. It would have the exact opposite because a lot of people would then be clueless to the fact that the practise goes on. Banning account sales would literally have zero positive effect here.

Your argument is completely meaningless. How would banning account sales make the trust system any more or less valid? It wouldn't.

A lot of people are already completely oblivious to the fact that account selling goes on.

I'm just pointing out that, as things stand right now, the trust system is completely meaningless, because trust can be bought and sold instead of earned. Are you denying this reality altogether?

And there'd be even less that were aware it went on if it wasn't allowed. If you're of the opinion that the trust system is completely meaningless then it's completely meaningless regardless. Banning account selling doesn't make it any more meaningful or valid. The trust system is a guide and not an ultimate honesty and trustworthiness barometer and you're free to interpret it in any way you want.

And there'd be even less that were aware it went on if it wasn't allowed.

What? That makes no sense. If it wasn't allowed, people would know that its not allowed.

Most of the time people don't stop to even think about it. They don't stop to consider they may be speaking or trading with a bought account. Its not really up to you to decide whether or not they should know this, the simple fact is, they don't.

Trust means nothing so long as accounts are bought and sold here.

I will be happy to provide the service of listing and pointing out bought accounts for general public awareness.

And there'd be even less that were aware it went on if it wasn't allowed.

What? That makes no sense. If it wasn't allowed, people would know that its not allowed.

Most of the time people don't stop to even think about it. They don't stop to consider they may be speaking or trading with a bought account. Its not really up to you to decide whether or not they should know this, the simple fact is, they don't.

Trust means nothing so long as accounts are bought and sold here.

I will be happy to provide the service of listing and pointing out bought accounts for general public awareness.

No, it makes sense. Your argument doesn't though. You seem to think that trust is only meaningless because accounts are allowed to be sold, but whether they are or not makes no difference to the trust system because accounts will still be sold regardless. Banning the sale of accounts changes absolutely nothing, apart from maybe making people like you think they're now a little but safer, when they're not.

No, it makes sense. Your argument doesn't though. You seem to think that trust is only meaningless because accounts are allowed to be sold, but whether they are or not makes no difference to the trust system because accounts will still be sold regardless. Banning the sale of accounts changes absolutely nothing, apart from maybe making people like you think they're now a little but safer, when they're not.

OK so lets just do away with pretending that the trust system actually matters then, can we?

The entire component should be removed from the forum since it is already prone to being abused.

You're like the American government trying to defend an indefensible position. You won't accept that there is an underlying flaw in the root of your logic.

Unless you are trading with a bought account, in which case trust is absolutely meaningless.

And how can you know if you are conducting a trade with a bought account?

You can't. Ergo, Bitcointalk's trust system ismeaningless.

Selling of accounts is nearly impossible if not completely impossible to control. You will have a hard time proving an account sold or bought if the account owner wants it that way. No one knows for sure everyone with whom they deal. This is the way the internet works and has so from the beginning. Simply insist on escrow for your trades it will protect in the future, problem all but solved. As has been stated many times, Trust is a starting point not an end all, be all. I know this is hard and one has to do a little thinking but a little common sense goes a long way. Let me give you an example:Account "Fred" has 20 positives. When looking at 15 of them, they are left by the same newbie and the trades are for $5 Paypal for the equivalent in BTC and all made within a week time frame. Could it be possible this was "bought Trust?" Possibly alt account of the buyer?My thinking process would lean towards yes. The next conclusion would be either stay away or start following the Trust trail for more information. Also, after 15 trades for $5, would I trust a deal for $500? No I would not.Account "Alice" has 5 trades from 5 different people on the Default list. All were buys over $300 each over a 1 month time period. If I wanted to sell a $300 item to this person, would I? After reading ALL Trust and it checks out, I would use escrow and proceed.Same account but "Alice" has not posted for a year. I would suspect a stolen or sold account and either use escrow or pass on any trades. Some Trust is spiteful and malicious but normally it is easy to spot.Bottom line: You need to protect yourself, sold account or not, use your brain and don't rely on others telling you what to do. If you don't like the Trust system, don't use it. To say it is meaningless is, well, meaningless.

No, it makes sense. Your argument doesn't though. You seem to think that trust is only meaningless because accounts are allowed to be sold, but whether they are or not makes no difference to the trust system because accounts will still be sold regardless. Banning the sale of accounts changes absolutely nothing, apart from maybe making people like you think they're now a little but safer, when they're not.

OK so lets just do away with pretending that the trust system actually matters then, can we?

The entire component should be removed from the forum since it is already prone to being abused.

You're like the American government trying to defend an indefensible position. You won't accept that there is an underlying flaw in the root of your logic.

Same can be said for your position. After placing new rules to protect that are unenforceable, you now have a false sense of more security.

When the subject of buying BTC with Paypal comes up, I often remember this:

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

There's not a flaw in my logic, but there is in yours. Everything can be abused in the world so should we get rid of that too? Nothing is perfect or flawless. The trust system serves its purpose as a guide regardless of whether it's perfect or can or is abused or not. Mods can abuse, users can abuse, police can abuse etc etc. That doesn't mean all those things are worthless and should be gotten rid of. Should we just get rid of the entire forum since it can be abused? No, we make do with what we've got. If you don't like the trust system or the way the forum operates or is run simply don't use them. You're not forced to nor are you obliged to take any trust or feedback sent/received seriously. That is entirely up to you.

Bottom line: You need to protect yourself, sold account or not, use your brain and don't rely on others telling you what to do. If you don't like the Trust system, don't use it. To say it is meaningless is, well, meaningless.

It is meaningless to me. How and why anybody would conduct any trades with anybody here they don't personally know is beyond me. Its just common sense to not trade with accounts here based on their trust rating since it is so easy to buy trust.

There's not a flaw in my logic, but there is in yours. Everything can be abused in the world so should we get rid of that too? Nothing is perfect or flawless. The trust system serves its purpose as a guide regardless of whether it's perfect or can or is abused or not. Mods can abuse, users can abuse, police can abuse etc etc. That doesn't mean all those things are worthless and should be gotten rid of. Should we just get rid of the entire forum since it can be abused? No, we make do with what we've got. If you don't like the trust system or the way the forum operates or is run simply don't use them. You're not forced to nor are you obliged to take any trust or feedback sent/received seriously. That is entirely up to you.

No, it makes sense. Your argument doesn't though. You seem to think that trust is only meaningless because accounts are allowed to be sold, but whether they are or not makes no difference to the trust system because accounts will still be sold regardless. Banning the sale of accounts changes absolutely nothing, apart from maybe making people like you think they're now a little but safer, when they're not.

OK so lets just do away with pretending that the trust system actually matters then, can we?

The entire component should be removed from the forum since it is already prone to being abused.

You're like the American government trying to defend an indefensible position. You won't accept that there is an underlying flaw in the root of your logic.

Isn't it funny how the biggest defenders of the default trust are those setting atop it? these people are not bitcoin supporters. a supporter of bitcoin would encourage decentralized consensus proof of trust algorithm. maybe they don't understand that bitcoin is decentralized proof of trust in and of itsself, but on the same token, perhaps they are corrupted morally and feel the need to protect their bottom line, by keeping a monopoly on the trust system, and their corruption has overriden their logical thinking algorithm. food for thought :-)

So long as you can buy and sell accounts, you can get trust that you didn't earn and use it to make trades with people who don't know they are trading with a bought account.

This is why account selling should be frowned upon and not openly endorsed.

And yet that fixes nothing, accounts will still be bought and sold. The "burden of proof" should not rest on the administrators but rather upon those wanting to trade, they are not here to hand hold. It is up to the individual to check the Trust of those they deal with and actually LOOK at what has been left and who left it. Then you can form an educated opinion if you want to believe it or not. A good thing about these buys and sells; it makes you really check the account before you trade. At least it should.Trust is not meaningless, it is a good starting point.

I do agree with everything you just said here. Perhaps the next step would be building a decentralized escrow system into the forum. (one can dream, and it will probably never happen for many reasons, some obvious and some not)

No, it makes sense. Your argument doesn't though. You seem to think that trust is only meaningless because accounts are allowed to be sold, but whether they are or not makes no difference to the trust system because accounts will still be sold regardless. Banning the sale of accounts changes absolutely nothing, apart from maybe making people like you think they're now a little but safer, when they're not.

OK so lets just do away with pretending that the trust system actually matters then, can we?

The entire component should be removed from the forum since it is already prone to being abused.

You're like the American government trying to defend an indefensible position. You won't accept that there is an underlying flaw in the root of your logic.

Isn't it funny how the biggest defenders of the default trust are those setting atop it? these people are not bitcoin supporters. a supporter of bitcoin would encourage decentralized consensus proof of trust algorithm. maybe they don't understand that bitcoin is decentralized proof of trust in and of itsself, but on the same token, perhaps they are corrupted morally and feel the need to protect their bottom line, by keeping a monopoly on the trust system, and their corruption has overriden their logical thinking algorithm. food for thought :-)

Well said. I really don't think I can add anything more to this discussion.

If Hilarious and Co want to keep justifying account selling, there's obviously nothing I can do to stop them since they have the power to change things and I don't.

I will continue to keep track of sold accounts to the best of my ability and warn other users if I see them attempting to run scams.

There's not a flaw in my logic, but there is in yours. Everything can be abused in the world so should we get rid of that too? Nothing is perfect or flawless. The trust system serves its purpose as a guide regardless of whether it's perfect or can or is abused or not. Mods can abuse, users can abuse, police can abuse etc etc. That doesn't mean all those things are worthless and should be gotten rid of. Should we just get rid of the entire forum since it can be abused? No, we make do with what we've got. If you don't like the trust system or the way the forum operates or is run simply don't use them. You're not forced to nor are you obliged to take any trust or feedback sent/received seriously. That is entirely up to you.

Edit: KWH has good points.

I'm just saying, you're encouraging evil dicklessness.

Feel free to ban me if it pleases you.

We're not encouraging it. We can't do anything about it and 'evil dicklessness' will happen regardless, but you don't seem to be able to comprehend this. And why would we ban you? Idiots are allowed a voice too regardless of how wrong or annoying they may be.

Isn't it funny how the biggest defenders of the default trust are those setting atop it? these people are not bitcoin supporters. a supporter of bitcoin would encourage decentralized consensus proof of trust algorithm. maybe they don't understand that bitcoin is decentralized proof of trust in and of itsself, but on the same token, perhaps they are corrupted morally and feel the need to protect their bottom line, by keeping a monopoly on the trust system, and their corruption has overriden their logical thinking algorithm. food for thought :-)

Says the guy who was desperately trying to buy trust to appear trustworthy. Bitcoin may be decentralised but this forum isn't. All you whingers and whiners should get together and create your own decentralised utopian bitcoin forum because I'd love to see how it wouldn't work.

Well said. I really don't think I can add anything more to this discussion.

If Hilarious and Co want to keep justifying account selling, there's obviously nothing I can do to stop them since they have the power to change things and I don't.

I will continue to keep track of sold accounts to the best of my ability and warn other users if I see them attempting to run scams.

You haven't been able to add anything to this discussion from the start. We don't have the power to change anything either because banning the sale of accounts will change absolutely nothing, but for some reason you are unable or unwilling to grasp this. How can you not comprehend this? Please tell me what good it would actually do? It wouldn't change a single thing except make it easier for people to fall victim to a bought account and that's why it is allowed.

You haven't been able to add anything to this discussion from the start. We don't have the power to change anything either because banning the sale of accounts will change absolutely nothing, but for some reason you are unable or unwilling to grasp this. How can you not comprehend this? Please tell me what good it would actually do? It wouldn't change a single thing except make it easier for people to fall victim to a bought account and that's why it is allowed.

You could simply ban account selling from the forum. That's what you do.

Then you still remind people that its possible that others are buying and selling accounts offsite, but its still illegal to do this onsite. So that's what you do.

It would do good because there wouldn't be as much buying and selling of accounts. I can't believe this isn't obvious to you. I don't think you can see things as clearly as you think that you do. Your position of power has warped your judgment to the viewpoint that you can do no wrong.

As an outsider, potential solutions to the problem are obvious. But you are fighting any sort of change tooth-and-nail, and I have better things to do with my time then help your forum maintain its existence. So much for credibility. To pretend this forum has any credibility is a disastrous lie.

You haven't been able to add anything to this discussion from the start. We don't have the power to change anything either because banning the sale of accounts will change absolutely nothing, but for some reason you are unable or unwilling to grasp this. How can you not comprehend this? Please tell me what good it would actually do? It wouldn't change a single thing except make it easier for people to fall victim to a bought account and that's why it is allowed.

You could simply ban account selling from the forum. That's what you do.

Then you still remind people that its possible that others are buying and selling accounts offsite, but its still illegal to do this onsite. So that's what you do.

It would do good because there wouldn't be as much buying and selling of accounts. I can't believe this isn't obvious to you. I don't think you can see things as clearly as you think that you do. Your position of power has warped your judgment to the viewpoint that you can do no wrong.

As an outsider, potential solutions to the problem are obvious. But you are fighting any sort of change tooth-and-nail, and I have better things to do with my time then help your forum maintain its existence. So much for credibility. To pretend this forum has any credibility is a disastrous lie.

Incoming new account in 2 minutes. Actually they probably make or have made dozens as has already been stated.Banning does nothing. It can't be enforced effectively. I can't believe this isn't obvious to you.People will still go to Skype, PM and other places to buy and sell without missing a step.Give us some viable solutions instead of quoting the same thing over and over.

EDIT: Personal attacks do nothing for your credibility.

When the subject of buying BTC with Paypal comes up, I often remember this:

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

There's not a flaw in my logic, but there is in yours. Everything can be abused in the world so should we get rid of that too? Nothing is perfect or flawless. The trust system serves its purpose as a guide regardless of whether it's perfect or can or is abused or not. Mods can abuse, users can abuse, police can abuse etc etc. That doesn't mean all those things are worthless and should be gotten rid of. Should we just get rid of the entire forum since it can be abused? No, we make do with what we've got. If you don't like the trust system or the way the forum operates or is run simply don't use them. You're not forced to nor are you obliged to take any trust or feedback sent/received seriously. That is entirely up to you.

Edit: KWH has good points.

I'm just saying, you're encouraging evil dicklessness.

Feel free to ban me if it pleases you.

We're not encouraging it. We can't do anything about it and 'evil dicklessness' will happen regardless, but you don't seem to be able to comprehend this. And why would we ban you? Idiots are allowed a voice too regardless of how wrong or annoying they may be.

Isn't it funny how the biggest defenders of the default trust are those setting atop it? these people are not bitcoin supporters. a supporter of bitcoin would encourage decentralized consensus proof of trust algorithm. maybe they don't understand that bitcoin is decentralized proof of trust in and of itsself, but on the same token, perhaps they are corrupted morally and feel the need to protect their bottom line, by keeping a monopoly on the trust system, and their corruption has overriden their logical thinking algorithm. food for thought :-)

Says the guy who was desperately trying to buy trust to appear trustworthy. Bitcoin may be decentralised but this forum isn't. All you whingers and whiners should get together and create your own decentralised utopian bitcoin forum because I'd love to see how it wouldn't work.

There is no whinging and whining going on. A simple statement of the facts, which you and others like you refuse to hear or give fair consideration.